Could Joe Louis beat Mike Tyson?

Personally I think Joe Louis (on a given day) could beat any Heavyweight who ever lived. I rank him number one all time, in legacy and head to head. He was a human being so of course he could be beaten. Give his prime self seven tries against any Heavyweight who ever fought on the Earth and I say Joe will win at least four of those seven encounters.

 

I agree with everything stated in this comment

 

Probably because of who was training him while at his peak. They did a much better job of getting Tyson into peak shape compared to the trainers of the average Louis opponent to their respective fighter.

Not really. Most of Louis's opponents are in the 180s and 190s. Tyson weighed 220 at his peak and walked around at like 240. His muscular cross sectional area is significantly larger than the typical Louis opponent. Here's the physique of the typical Louis opponent: https://boxrec.com/media/images//0/07/SchmelingMx30.jpg

Here's Mike Tyson: https://boxrec.com/media/images//8/89/Miketyson.JPG

I think rational people would say yeah Mike is a LOT bigger.

If you review the footage I think you'll find that what I said is correct. Fighters back then typically didn't throw as many punches.

Well, what is your definition of defense and skills? You don't think Mike Tyson had better defense and skills than the average Louis opponent?

 

I believe he thought you were saying Tyson had better defense, skills, and endurance than Louis himself as opposed to his opponents which I believe is what you were trying to say.

 

I thought you were talking about Tyson vs Louis, not average Louis opponent. If that was your point, then you can say the same thing about Louis vs average Tyson opponent (except size). It doesn't tell us anything interesting at all.

 

Average Tyson opponent was more skilled and a lot bigger than average Louis opponent.
Tyson was more skilled and bigger than Louis.

 

Disagree with both for skillset. Smaller boxers are usually more skilled and there is no exception here. Not to mention that Louis resume is significantly deeper.

 

Smaller fighters are indeed more skilled, but not when they fought 100 years ago. Their skills were very poor compared to modern boxers.

 

Thank god the Louis title reign began only 85 years ago. Another 15 years back and he would have been a chump.

 

Another lazy take from you, not a surprise.

 

Another FACT you choose to ignore, no surprise.
Early century boxers simply cannot match their modern counterparts.

 

You should start differentiate facts and your opinions, cause usually they are quite far apart.

 

1) All early boxers fall short of modern boxers --> Unsupported premise

2) Louis was an early boxer

3) Therefore, Louis falls short of modern boxers


...Most people on this forum think Louis was very skilled by modern standards. They are unlikely to be convinced otherwise by pointing at his date of birth. They are more likely to be convinced by pointing at actual technical details that made Louis unskilled.

 

Looking back on my comment I suppose there was room for misinterpretation. While I wrote it I figured the first sentence let you know I was talking about the opponents of Louis. Sorry about that guys.

That's pretty fair although maybe what I was driving at is the disparity in the level of competitiveness between Mike Tyson compared to Joe Louis's
opponents is much greater than that of Joe Louis compared to Mike Tyson's opponents. I mean, think of Mike Tyson's opponents going through Joe Louis's resume and Joe Louis's opponents going through Mike Tyson's resume.

Anyway, I think Tyson had to be better to beat the guys he fought than Louis had to be to beat the guys he fought.